From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Wolford, Jeff
Sent: Tue 12/7/2004 5:25 PM
To: Hale Landis; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [t13] ATAPI Overlap and Queuing
This message is from the T13 list server.
Remember
folks: Obsolete and removed only means that no further work is going to be done
on these commands. Not that they can no longer be used (i.e. CHS... Its
obsolete, but all the desktop HDDs still support it -:)
Jeff
Jeff
Wolford
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Master Architect
Storage Interface and Tools -
Business PC Group
Voice: (281)
514-9465, Pager: (800) 973-5739
Hewlett-Packard
Corporation
>-----Original Message-----
>From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
On
>Behalf Of Hale Landis
>Sent: Tuesday, December 07, 2004 6:53
PM
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: RE: [t13] ATAPI Overlap and
Queuing
>
>This message is from the T13 list
server.
>
>
>On Tue, 7 Dec 2004 15:42:21 -0800, Mark Overby
wrote:
>>This message is from the T13 list server.
>>I can
firmly state that there are at least two host
>controllers on
the
>>market that support command queuing for ATA devices in
hardware.
>
>OK, then I would agree that O/Q should not be removed
for
>either PATA ATA or ATAPI devices.
>
>But this is such a
mess...
>
>* Old style O/Q maybe supported by some PATA ATA devices
and
>maybe by some PATA ATAPI devices (MKE note: The PACKET
command
>supports old style PATA O/Q. Note everyone: The R/W DMA
QUEUED
>commands are the PATA O/Q commands for for ATA
devices).
>
>* Is old style O/Q supported by SATA for SATA ATA or
SATA
>ATAPI devices? Is there any reason old style O/Q can not
be
>made obsolete for SATA?
>
>* Is new style queuing (is that
NCQ?) supported for SATA
>ATAPI? If so, what changes have been made for
this (new
>version of the PACKET command, or new options of the
PACKET
>command)? Is there a definition of new style queuing
(NCQ?)
>for SATA ATAPI? If not, why
not?
>
>Hale
>
>
>*** Hale Landis ***
www.ata-atapi.com
***
>
>
>
>
